You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

RichardChappell comments on What is Eliezer Yudkowsky's meta-ethical theory? - Less Wrong Discussion

33 Post author: lukeprog 29 January 2011 07:58PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (368)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: RichardChappell 01 February 2011 04:56:46AM 0 points [-]

The answer to those objections, by the way, is that an "adequately objective" metaethics is impossible

That's not a reason to prefer EY's theory to an error theory (according to which properly normative properties would have to be irreducibly normative, but no such properties actually exist).

Comment author: lukeprog 01 February 2011 12:51:00PM 3 points [-]

Richard,

Until persuaded otherwise, I agree with you on this point. (These days, I take Richard Joyce to have the clearest defense of error theory, and I just subtract his confusing-to-me defense of fictionalism.) Besides, I think there are better ways of getting something like an 'objective' ethical theory (in something like a 'realist' sense) while still holding that reasons for action arise only from desires, or from relations between desires and states of affairs. In fact, that's the kind of theory I defend: desirism. Though, I'm not too interested anymore in whether desirism is to be called 'objective' or 'realist', even though I think a good case can be made for both.